The most thorough report ever released on America’s reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic has concluded that virtually everything that would have gotten you banned from social media for spreading “misinformation” was true.
After a two-year investigation, the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic released its 520-page report (titled “After Action Review of the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Lessons Learned and a Path Forward”) earlier this week. The report finds that the coronavirus that causes COVID-19 likely originated from a lab leak at China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology, where it may have been manufactured as a chimera.
Lockdowns, mask mandates, social distancing, and vaccine mandates were not based on sound science and did more harm than good, the House subcommittee report says. Natural immunity exists for COVID-19, as it does for other viruses. And then-President Donald Trump’s “racist” travel bans likely saved lives.
Expressing any of these would have been enough to get one banned from social media.
Twitter, now X, infamously set up a portal for government agents to flag “misinformation” and target posts or whole accounts for shadow bans, censorship, or removal. Meta, owner of Facebook, boasted that, since December 2020, “following consultations with leading health organizations, including the World Health Organization (WHO),” the company had “removed false claims about COVID-19 vaccines that have been debunked by public health experts” from Facebook and Instagram. In February, Meta broadened its list of verboten ideas “to include additional debunked claims about the coronavirus and vaccines” such as “COVID-19 is man-made or manufactured” and “Vaccines are not effective at preventing the disease.”
The new House report debunks this “debunking.”
1. The COVID-19 virus was probably man-made and originated from a lab leak at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
From the outset, public health officials such as Dr. Anthony Fauci presented the novel coronavirus outbreak as the result of a “zoonotic spillover”—that the virus transferred from an animal to humans, probably a bat purchased at a wet market and eaten. Yet, the report says in a headline, the balance of the evidence shows that “SARS-CoV-2, the Virus that Causes COVID-19, Likely Emerged Because of a Laboratory or Research Related Accident.”
“The U.S. National Institutes of Health funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology,” Rep. Brad Wenstrup, R-Ohio, writes in his introduction.
In 2018, the nonprofit EcoHealth applied for a federal grant to fund a new project at the Wuhan Institute of Virology which “sought to do what nature had not been ever known to do—insert a furin cleavage site into a SARS2 virus,” states the report. “EcoHealth and its WIV partners stated their intent to create a SARS-like virus with a furin cleavage site, which is the exact same feature that made humans susceptible to COVID-19 infection.”
Rather than come clean about this federal funding, “Dr. Anthony Fauci Played Semantics with the Definition of Gain-of-Function Research,” the report concludes.
“The WIV has a published record of conducting ‘gain-of-function’ research to engineer chimeric viruses,” noted a State Department fact sheet released in January 2021. “The U.S. government has reason to believe that several researchers inside the WIV became sick in autumn 2019, before the first identified case of the outbreak, with symptoms consistent with both COVID-19.”
Further, “key evidence that would be expected if the virus had emerged from the wildlife trade is still missing,” such as infected animals. Dr. Alina Chan, a molecular biologist at MIT and Harvard, wrote in The New York Times that “the outbreak at the Wuhan market probably happened after the virus had already been circulating in humans.”
Dr. Robert Redfield, the Trump administration’s director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, testified before Congress on March 8 that “COVID-19 infections more likely were the result of an accidental lab leak than the result of a natural spillover event.”
Weeks earlier, the FBI and the Department of Energy expressed their support for the lab leak theory, with varying degrees of confidence. Even legacy media fact-checker Glenn Kessler of The Washington Post, who originally claimed “it is virtually impossible for this virus [to] jump from the lab,” later acknowledged that the lab leak theory was “credible.”
2. Social distancing of 6 feet had no science to back it up.
The rule that Americans keep “social distancing” of 6 feet between one another to prevent COVID-19 transmission became one of the most consequential events of the pandemic. Businesses deemed worthy of being open had to limit how many customers they could serve, and schools had to rearrange rooms or resort to virtual learning to comply with the new guidelines.
The House report states bluntly: “There Was No Quantitative Scientific Support for Six Feet of Social Distancing.” Yet the report merely repeats what the guidelines’ authors have already admitted.
Last Jan. 9, Fauci replied “I don’t recall” when asked where the guideline of 6 feet came from.
“It sort of just appeared” from the ether, he said. “I was not aware of studies” that justified the social distancing decision.
The rule, Fauci said, amounted to “just an empiric decision that wasn’t based on data or even data that could be accomplished.”
Two days later, Dr. Francis Collins, Fauci’s boss as former director of the National Institutes of Health, testified that he “did not see evidence” to support the 6-foot rule. On June 3, Fauci admitted that “there wasn’t a controlled trial … there wasn’t that scientific evaluation of” the rule.
In short, says the House report: “There were no scientific trials or studies conducted before this policy was implemented, there appeared to be no pushback or internal discussion amongst the highest level of leadership, and more importantly there appears to be no acceptance of responsibility. That is an unacceptable answer from public health leadership.”
3. Masks do not effectively stop the spread of the COVID-19 virus—and masking children did more harm than good.
The most ubiquitous symbol of the COVID-19 era was the paper face mask. The masks, required by public venues and many businesses, supposedly protected their users against transmission of the novel coronavirus. YouTube suspended Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., a medical doctor, for posting a video quoting studies saying that masks do not work.
The suspension of Paul seemed odd, as the government itself ultimately performed a triple Lutz on the efficacy of face masks.
“Seriously people—STOP BUYING MASKS!” tweeted then-Surgeon General Jerome Adams on leap day, Feb. 29, 2020. “They are NOT effective in preventing general public from catching #Coronavirus, but if health care providers can’t get them to care for sick patients, it puts them and our communities at risk!”
The CDC and the World Health Organization issued guidelines in March 2020 encouraging mask-wearing only for those who were ill or caring for someone who was. But a month later, in April 2020, the CDC issued guidance recommending people wear masks around others and, the report says, “went as far as posting a video teaching the public how to make masks with a T-shirt and rubber bands.”
During his first two days in office in January 2021, President Joe Biden signed executive orders making the wearing of masks compulsory for federal workers and contractors, and then on airplanes and other public transportation. Biden administration officials offered contradictory statistics, telling the public that wearing masks made them anywhere from 350% to 56% less likely to get COVID-19.
As this author wrote at The Daily Wire, the Biden administration relied on flawed studies, one of which “found that cloth masks could reduce transmission—or make the wearer 17% more likely to test positive than someone wearing no mask.” Most studies showed no correlation between COVID-19 outbreaks in schools and masking.
In other headlines, the new House report verifies what Paul and science have long known: “Masks and Mask Mandates Were Ineffective at Controlling the Spread of COVID-19,” and “Forcibly Masking Young Children, Ages Two and Older, Caused More Harm than Good.”
The report cites the U.K.-based Cochrane Collaboration, whose research “did not show a clear reduction in respiratory viral infection with the use of medical/surgical masks” and that “[t]here were no clear differences between the use of medical/surgical masks compared with N95/P2 respirators in healthcare workers when used in routine care to reduce respiratory viral infection.”
Numerous studies over many years had come to the same conclusion. In 2015, the BMJ publication discovered that cloth masks offered “almost 0%” filtration of viruses. In fact, “Moisture retention, reuse of cloth masks and poor filtration may result in increased risk of infection.”
One team of researchers found “significant levels of pollutants” in all face masks, questioning whether paper face masks are “safe to be used on a daily basis and what consequences are to be expected after their disposal into the environment.”
“Ignoring the science and facts of COVID-19 and the harms of masking young children was profoundly immoral on behalf of the leadership of the country’s public health officials,” states the House report.
The Biden administration began to walk back mask mandates and directives in 2021 and 2022. “The science has changed,” Dr. Leana Wen, formerly president of Planned Parenthood, told CNN in February 2022. Yet the science had always shown masks do a poor job of preventing the transmission of viruses.
The results bear this out. “The trajectories of the rate of COVID-19 infections for states with mask mandates and states without is virtually identical,” the report notes.
4. Science did not support COVID-19 vaccine mandates, which needlessly hurt Americans and the U.S. military.
On Aug. 24, 2021—one day after FDA approval of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine—Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin announced a vaccine mandate for the U.S. armed forces.
In November, the Biden administration extended the vaccine mandate to all federal workers, health care workers who worked in a facility accepting federal Medicare or Medicaid funds, and Head Start contractors or volunteers. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration issued a federal vaccine mandate for all employers with 100 employees or more.
“The COVID-19 vaccine mandates caused people to lose their livelihoods, hollowed out our healthcare and education workforces, reduced our military readiness and recruitment, caused vaccine hesitancy, reduced trust in public health, trampled individual freedoms, deepened political divisions, and interfered in the patient-physician relationship,” says the report.
In all, more than 8,000 soldiers left—or were fired from—the military for refusing to take the then-experimental COVID-19 jab. “However, more than 17,500 troops’ religious exemptions were still being adjudicated just prior to the rescission of the COVID-19 vaccine mandate,” states the report.
Gil Cisneros, Biden’s undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness, defended the great military vaccine purge as “appropriate disciplinary action” necessary “to maintain good order and discipline,” which affected only a “small fraction” of service members.
“Congressman, I would say we are as strong as ever” after the mass firing, Cisneros told then-Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla.
The report finds it no coincidence that, in 2022, the military missed its recruitment goals by 25%, or 15,000 soldiers. “Vaccine Mandates Were Not Supported by Science and Caused More Harm than Good,” the report concludes.
5. Natural immunity applies to COVID-19, like any other virus.
Yet the Biden-Harris administration attempted to coerce Americans into getting the COVID-19 shot, in part, by denying or dismissing a scientific fact that applies to every other virus in existence: natural immunity.
Once someone has gotten a viral infection, that person develops antibodies that lower the risk of reinfection. “Public Health Officials Disregarded Natural Immunity, Despite Its Proven Effectiveness and Durability,” says the House report.
As this author reported at The Washington Stand, Biden administration officials formally denied the efficacy of natural immunity, under oath.
“There’s no good evidence, and the research is still going on as to how we need to progress with this,” Cisneros testified to Congress last Feb. 28. “But as for right now, natural immunity is not something we believe in for this, and so we are still moving forward” with vaccine mandates.
6. COVID-era lockdowns had no scientific grounding and irreparably harmed Americans.
If face masks were the most prominent sight of the COVID-19 era, its most infamous words were uttered March 16, 2020: “15 days to slow the spread.” The government ordered Americans to “shelter in place” and not have unnecessary physical contact with anyone else.
Church members were often ordered not to meet in person or saw their attendance severely limited. Schools closed down. Businesses not deemed “essential” closed, many permanently. Relatives died without their loved ones at their side.
Ronald Reagan once said that a government program “is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth.” The “15-day” program proved no exception. Dr. Deborah Birx, the White House coronavirus response coordinator, admitted: “No sooner had we convinced the Trump administration to implement our version of a two-week shutdown than I was trying to figure out how to extend it.”
In some areas, restricted capacity endured for more than a year.
The House report notes: “Unscientific COVID-19 Lockdowns Caused More Harm Than Good.” The lockdowns were unnecessary and extracted a demanding mental and physical toll on Americans. Lockdowns ignored the fact that the virus proved most deadly to the elderly and vulnerable populations with comorbidities.
By August 2020, the CDC knew that 40% of Americans were struggling with mental health issues. A study in Nature released in March found mental health disorders surged by 22% from 2019 to 2020. Another study found an extra 212 young people committed suicide in 2020, and the CDC found adolescent overdoses more than doubled during the lockdown period.
Adults also died at higher rates from other diseases. “One analysis done using CDC data found that non-COVID-19 excess deaths totaled nearly 100,000 per year in 2020 and 2021,” the report states.
Further, “Long Term School Closures Were Not Supported by Available Science and Evidence,” notes the House report. Instead, the Biden administration invited a teachers union, the American Federation of Teachers led by Randi Weingarten, to shape the federal government’s school closure guidelines.
The AFT’s “School Closures Significantly Contributed to Increased Instances of Mental and Behavioral Health Issues” and “Made an Already Alarming Trend in Declining Physical Health Worse,” states the report.
“The American people could have been better served by policies which focused on protecting the most vulnerable while prioritizing productivity and normalcy for the less vulnerable,” the report concludes.
COVID-19 had one additional casualty: American liberty. “The Constitution cannot be suspended in times of crisis and restrictions on freedoms sow distrust in public health,” Wenstrup writes.
7. Trump’s ‘racist’ China travel ban likely saved lives.
When Trump learned of the COVID-19 outbreak in China, he promptly paused all inbound flights to the United States from China. Although the legacy media regarded this as a “racist” undertaking, President Trump’s travel restrictions against China—and Europe—delayed the spread, the House report finds.
“With four years of hindsight, it is clear the international travel restrictions early in the pandemic delayed spread of the virus but did not prevent COVID-19 from entering the U.S. By the time the European travel ban was enacted in March 2020, it is now known that the virus had already spread significantly within the U.S. due to earlier untracked travel from Europe,” the report notes.
It adds: “One study estimated that the U.S. travel bans helped to prevent approximately 77,000 cases of COVID-19 in the first month of their implementation. This study concluded that, while the travel restrictions did not entirely stop the virus from entering the U.S., they were effective in slowing the rate of transmission, giving the U.S. healthcare system more time to prepare and respond to the pandemic.”
***
Critics welcomed the report’s openness but argued it didn’t go far enough to address the adverse impact of the COVID-19 shot and suppression of basic civil liberties.
“Forgive my cynicism,” Dr. Robert Malone, chief medical and regulatory officer for The Unity Project, told “Washington Watch with Tony Perkins” on Tuesday. “I don’t see the federal government at this point in time taking these suggestions in and acting appropriately to respond to them. This should be a very active [case of] ‘lessons learned’ on their openness and transparency. We’re not seeing that.”
Malone noted the House report’s odd “juxtaposition of endorsement of Operation Warp Speed, followed by a resounding lack of endorsement of the efficacy and safety of the vaccines.” He found the disconnect “perplexing” or an example of “the usual D.C. process of speaking out of both sides of one’s mouth.”
Prekins, president of the Family Research Council, agreed that transparency over public health measures is “something I think we need to stay on” in the second Trump administration.
Malone is “right to be cynical, because government rarely learns its lessons,” Perkins said.
This article was originally published at www.dailysignal.com
